How can people say homosexuality doesn't hurt anyone

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic13
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You’re going on ignore Kendra. You refuse to answer my questions and you’re only trying to antagonize me at this point. You’ve adding nothing to the thread but confusion.
Wow. You are the one who called me out, yet I’m the antagonizer? Yeah, OK.
 
I would like you to explain what point you are making. In your OP you said that homosexuality causes disease, and then you said homosexual acts cause disease and then you moved onto any sexual acts outside of marriage causes disease. So which is it?

Lou
For the 31st time. No homosexuality does not cause disease. **Homosexual activity/sex acts do. **You guys are just repeating yourselves at this point trying to bait me into an emotional response. Nobody has a legitimate argument.

[Remember that if you feel like repeating 'heterosexual sex acts cause disease too" that it does nothing to nullify the damage caused by “homosexual activity”…homosexual activity still causes harm]
 
For the 31st time. No homosexuality does not cause disease. **Homosexual activity/sex acts do. **
Glad we got that cleared up :rolleyes:
[Remember that if you feel like repeating 'heterosexual sex acts cause disease too" that it does nothing to nullify the damage caused by “homosexual activity”…homosexual activity still causes harm]
The reason I repeat “heterosexual acts cause disease too” is because any sexual act can cause disease. It isn’t just because two people of the same gender have sex.

I’ll say it again. ** Any sexual act can cause disease.** Don’t point the finger solely at homosexuals, and so-called “homosexual acts” which is what you have stated in previous posts.

Lou
 
Glad we got that cleared up :rolleyes:

The reason I repeat “heterosexual acts cause disease too” is because any sexual act can cause disease. It isn’t just because two people of the same gender have sex.

I’ll say it again. ** Any sexual act can cause disease.** Don’t point the finger solely at homosexuals, and so-called “homosexual acts” which is what you have stated in previous posts.

Lou
Do homosexual sex acts cause harm? Yes or no.
 
No.

Sexual acts cause harm.

Lou
See, you’re the type of person I was asking about in the OP. You deny facts and say “homosexuality doesn’t hurt anyone” WHy do you tell people that homosexuality doesn’t hurt anyone?
  • than homosexual acts.]*
 
See, you’re the type of person I was asking about in the OP. You deny facts and say “homosexuality doesn’t hurt anyone” WHy do you tell people that homosexuality doesn’t hurt anyone
Because it doesn’t. Sexual acts can spread disease, not homosexuality.
  • than homosexual acts.]*
I didn’t see where you made this clear. 🤷 Although quicker to type, it is factually incorrect and leads to confusion.

Lou
 
What, sexual attraction causes disease? :rolleyes:

Lou
I’m not surprised you didn’t read the definition.

ho-mo-sex-u-al-i-ty

sexual desire OR** behavior directed toward a person or persons of one’s own sex.**
 
I’m not surprised you didn’t read the definition.

ho-mo-sex-u-al-i-ty

sexual desire OR** behavior directed toward a person or persons of one’s own sex.**
And I’m not surprised you still aren’t listening to any other posters.

Yes, homosexual behaviour can mean sex. Yes, these sexual acts can sometimes lead to disease. But do you know something else?
heterosexuality
[het-er-uh-sek-shoo-al-i-tee or, esp. British, -seks-yoo-] Spell Syllables
Word Origin
noun
1.
sexual feeling or** behavior directed toward a person or persons of the opposite sex.**
dictionary.reference.com/browse/heterosexuality?s=t
Heterosexual behaviour can mean sex. These sexual acts can sometimes lead to disease.

This is why your argument is invalid.

Lou
 
Homosexuality can mean sex. 😉
It can, but it’s rarely used in this method.

The most common usage of the term “homosexuality” is to refer to the attraction. Occasionally it is used to refer to relationships, which can be sexual but are not necessarily so. It’s fairly rarely used to actually mean sex.

This thread continues to be meaningless though. You are arguing for proportionalism, which is not a Catholic philosophy. The morality of an action does not depend on it having negative effects, nor do negative effects necessarily mean something is immoral (STD transmission within a marriage, for example).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top